Slow start to year as camera production and shipping plunge

According to the latest data released by CIPA, the number of cameras made and shipped in the first month of 2018 barely reached 70% of the volume for the same period last year and the year before that. Not a great start to the year...

As usual, cameras with lenses built in—compacts and bridge cameras—continue to show the worst decline, with only half as many of these models shipped to the USA and Asia in January 2018 as there were in January 2017. But while production and shipments were quite dramatically down by volume, measurements by value are not quite so bad, indicating that a more high priced cameras are selling... or that camera prices are rising.

The value of interchangeable lens system mirrorless cameras produced actually rose by 8% even though the volume produced was only 80% of production last January—just fractionally ahead of DSLRs. Interestingly, DSLR shipments to Japan in that period were up on the previous year by volume and by value, but it was the only region that didn't see a decline in this category.

Further figures released by CIPA demonstrate the market’s decline since 2016, and show that while January 2017 was almost level with January 2016, this year has started very differently. The decline of cameras with built-in lenses has dropped to only 60% of the number shipped in 2016, and more worryingly, graphs show that January 2018 shipment figures are well below almost every other month in the last two years.

Hopefully this is just a blip, and we'll see the numbers jump back into the black (or closer to it) in February. For more information, visit the CIPA website, or check out the full report here.

Comments

Families used to buy a low end SLR, now they just use their phone, no real need for an SLR. Nikon and Canon have tried to fool people into believing they need an expensive FF camera, whereas APS-C is good enough these days, even for pros. it never used to cost $2000 for an entry level camera. Camera companies only have themselves to blame for pricing themselves out of a reducing market.

All the families I know bought compact fixed lens cameras, 110 and disposable cameras in 35mm. I don’t think many bought SLRs or DSLRs and the wave was the transition from film to digital and we are going back to sales as they were when 35mm film was common place, which is very little IC lens cameras.

Lower Unit Sales = More Stable Market = Stable Production Volume for Manufacturers = Increased Pricing = Longer Model Lifespan = Fewer Rebates/Discounts. So you will pay more for new models as they need to cover the development costs with fewer units being sold.Digital has not been a blessing for the camera companies, they were projecting it would take 4 to 6 years for Digital to be 50% of the market. In 1 year it went from 80% Film and 20% Digital, to 20% Film and 80% Digital. The camera companies ordered parts and assembled product based on their projections; all of them had a lot of film cameras in production and lots of parts to make many more when they had to switch to digital. And dealers would not buy these film cameras at any price. Manufacturers hoped that once the initial demand was filled for digital that film sales would come back and both Digital and Film would live together in the marketplace. Still waiting.

Cause we all have great cameras already ;) I've yet to see a need to upgrade my Panasonic G85 for video. I wouldn't gain much in terms of quality on the GH5, maybe the slow mo would be fun, but it has trade offs like being heavier and way more expensive.

The full frame cameras have no flip out screens so, no need for those to make my life more difficult. Make better cameras and we'll buy them ;)

In Australia, prices have shot up, so there's the reason unit sales are down.When the a7rii was first released (two and a half years ago), I purchased mine for $2800 Au, brand new. Today, the a7rii currently sells for $3499 Au, and that's after the a9, a7riii, and a7iii have been released/announced.

Less units sold, higher profits per unit seems to be the current business model.Den

and what they waited for after increasing and increasing the prices? Also, how many cameras must have one customer? And how many he must buy every year? Market is market and his volume can;t be increased always and permanent. Cameras are not food or shoes, people can live without them, also there are mobile phone and for many people its absolutely enough for make sometimes some self photos by phone camera. I published 4 last books with my 10 years old Nikon D700 and Nikon 28-105 lens and this complete is more then enough for any kind of photography, even now. Why we must buy every year new cameras?

Would it be a good idea to replace the tilt-swivel LCD screen with a lightning or USB-C connector that tilts and swivels alongside a shallow cavity that would allow an average sized flagship phone to sit recessed in the back panel of a DSLR or MILC? Then companies can take advantage of the great screens (both resolution and touch capabilities) of smartphones and allow smartphone users to save images and share images easier? Perhaps maybe we could spark some synergy between smartphones and consumer cameras? Also, with powerful AI imaging chips in phones now (i.e. pixel, etc.) maybe cameras could take advantage of that too to warrant higher frame rates or buffer etc.

Camera manufactures are quickly loosing a segment of their audience. There are still many of us that enjoy creating photos [not taking pictures] using some version of current innovations. Eventually, only professionals w fairly deep pockets will be able to afford their products and then they can continue to lament their financial woes because of a limited segment of buyers or.... they'll RIF some employees to create their "fat cat" profit margins. We all need to remember the best camera is the one you have w you even if it's "just" a cell phone using computational methods to achieve results

If the camera production is down, say 50% and below, definitely there will be many camera maker closed and maybe there are just three camera maker are survive: Canon, Nikon, and Sony. Nikon definitely will hard because it is just camera maker.

True, I bought my D610 in 2014, still happy with it, and I see brand new ones still up on Amazon. So the pipeline of cameras is still pretty bogged down with old models. I bought a D5300 two years ago and had it modded for 650nm for AP work, so no big camera needs other than wanting a dedicated purpose AP camera with no CFA and thermal cooling. Don't think those make it into the CIPA numbers. :)

I've a 4 year old 5D mk III and recently a M5. I had a A6000 but saw the price of the A6500.. not a chance at that price. Likewise the 5D IV, not enough of an improvement to justify it. I suspect many others are feeling the same. Spent money on 16-35 L and Sigma 24-105 instead, oh and samyang 24mm f1.4 for astro.

I am sure it has been said already, but the phrase "camera with built-in lenses" now includes phone-cameras, so ignoring the dominant makers of "cameras with built-in lenses" (Samsung and Apple, or maybe it is Samsung and Sony if you look at who makes the actual camera modules) and then talking "doom!" is an ongoing silliness.

The drop in ILC sales is more significant: how much is that just that improvements are far less "must have" for most ILC owners than they were a few years ago, so people are keeping the ILC that they have for longer?

Another way to measure "ILC interest" would be to track _lens_ sales: does CIPA report on that?

I'm still quite happily using my 5D mk III after about 5 years with no particularly urgent need to upgrade and I suspect I'm not the only one with a "good enough" camera body. Lenses are another matter; during the last two years I've upgraded my tele zoom, ultrawide zoom, acquired the 14mm Sigma f/1.8 and a second-hand macro lens.

As far as upgrading the camera body goes, I will happily wait until the successor of the 5D mk IV comes in a couple of years and see if I want that or something that accepts Canon lenses with an adapter, or neither.

I bought a Canon 5D MK2 some years ago for around half of what a MK 4 costs today.Disposable income (at least for myself) isn't what it once was.The only feasible options are consumer grade replacement or keep making do with the camera phone.

If you have only $1000 would you get a camera that only takes pictures or a phone that can edit spreadsheets, take notes, take pictures, play games on and schedule your calendar?Many users are deciding to just use the cell phone they spent a grand on.

People are finding the improvements are not enough to justify the expense. I don't blame them. If I need a tool I'll buy it. After that I don't need to buy another until I find the tool can't get the work done that I have for it.

Computer manufacturers went through this same thing and then realized they had to level off production, not sell too cheap and build a higher quality. Some went out of business or were acquired by another (ie. Packard Bell, Gateway, Commodore, and many more).

The market and business will correct itself as the cameras are pretty much all good. Some will stop making them and others will continue just in a different fashion.

It’s probably not about just losing sales to phone cameras any more as smartphone sales are also plateauing as they have now reached saturation as well - everyone who wants one already has a perfectly good working one which will last for years as new models are just incremental improvements now.

When you look at digital cameras, it has become over the last few years a very mature market, and digital imaging has not undergone a major breakthrough yet (at least as far as I am concerned). I would not deny that the last generations of cameras are quite superb as they are more sufficient for 99% of my shooting. I have no plans to update my dSLR gear for quite sometime but frankly we are quit lucky to have great tools to work with. I was talking to my dad who has kindly worked on digitalizing photos he took from the mid-late70s up to the late 80s (best present he could give me :)). In 15 years he shot with the same camera (Konica SLR with a 28 and 50 mm). Looking back at some of those photos, I just realized how good those cameras were built (metal) and lasted "forever". In the end, the eye is the camera and the camera is the toolbox.

I agree. I think the camera makers are slowly returning to where they were before the digital compact boom and will now make far fewer but higher quality cameras designed to last for years like they used to do.

Compact cameras, and now phonecams, are simply replacing the hundreds of millions of Kodak Instamatics and Fuji disposables snapshots developed at 1-Hour photo kiosks. Companies like Nikon and Minolta were never in this space to begin with, so their exit is just a return to their basics.

There is a danger of things getting real ugly: since camera makers cannot gain enough money from lower tier, they have to charge more for mid and higher tier, for R&D and other needs. And since the pro business is crowded already, a lot of pro photographers may just stick with their old cameras as well as amateurs, because second hand market is full with good DSLRs. Which can cause market's fall in a spiral nosedive.

What digital needs is the equivalent in weight, size, and function to the ultimate achievement of the fixed-lens idea in the days of film: the Rollei 35 S. It was the size of a cigarette package and with fine-grain processing yielded superb 11 x 14 and even 16 x 20 prints. Canon was almost there (size of cigarette package) with the now-ended $500, 12 MP, Canon G16, whose sensor was small (1/6th full-size) but with a marvelous high-speed (f/1.8) RETRACTABLE 5X zoom and full manual, plus video and Wi-Fi. (Its OVF was suboptimal, however.) We were waiting for the f/1.2 G17 with integrated EVF but it never appeared. The point is that this was a REAL CAMERA unlike the FAKE CAMERAS that are driving photography into the ground. The rest of digital (and I mean the entirety) is TOO CUMBERSOME to carry, OVERLY SOPHISTICATED, and TOO COSTLY.

Everyone could look at the changes in the photography world and predict this downturn. Yes, smartphones are part of the reason, but their is another, more subtle reason, too.

New developments in camera technology used to come regularly. Every year or two, cameras would improve to the point where we amateurs just had to have the new model.

But now, not so much. Camera technology has reached a plateau. Yes, there are those that say mirrorless is the next must-have, but really, would your full-frame Nikon DSLR photos be significantly better if they are taken instead with the newest Sony mirrorless?

I used to trade up to the newest camera body every two years or so. But now, I don't really have a good reason to trade.

I’m not convinced it has in general, I think Canon and Nikon have though. Other manufacturers are adding in-body stabilisation, usable 4k video (unlike Canon’s), auto-focus points that cover most of the frame (unlike the centre only ones on Canon/Nikon), continuous eye auto-focus, touchscreen focus and so on.

I’m sure that the main problem in the market, is that smartphone users are less and less keen on buying a SLR as their smartphone gets better. SLRs are too big for most consumers, yet most high street stores seem to push them smaller camera like the a6000 or a rx100 series camera.

The new Samsung S9 is being advertised as a camera here in Australia, no mention of "phone" features, so this is certainly a factor. But leaders like Canon releasing new products with 8 year old tech is not exactly helping either.

I want to say to manufacturers its their own fault largely. Offering gimped cameras is not going down well with those who know a bit about cameras.

With gimped cameras I mean they include software to limit the abilities of the cameras to do what manufacturers think is protecting their other product lines. This causes stagnation because people will rather sit on the fence. Compare it with other camera related products; they offer top of the range specs. Phones, action cameras and drones have 4k pretty much as a standard. Cameras seldom have it, and if they do you will pay an arm and a leg, or even the 4k specs will be gimped. With other features it is a similar story.

Example 1: Panasonic G9 has gimped video specs introduced through software to 'protect' the GH5. Fine, protect it, but no deal cuz im not stupid.Example 2: Eos m50 crop penality with 4k; it's like Canon wants to milk the cow so badly, but we see through it.Example 3: Fuji X-H1 not offering pixel shift is criminal.

Yep, same here. I was in the market for an upgrade of my 6D but the 6D2 for the price offered is a joke. Look at the new Sony A73 for the same price!Canon, what were you thinking?I basically have to either get the much higher priced 5D4 which is much heavier as well or... well, nothing. No other options in the $2k region with Canon, and there is likely no new options in the next 2 years. 6Dand 5D lines had both their recent upgrades and will stick there for another few years. Great...I am more and more willing to try Sony with an adaptor. I have good L glass and the A73 is really, really attractive for the price.

"Example 1: Panasonic G9 has gimped video specs introduced through software to 'protect' the GH5. Fine, protect it, but no deal cuz im not stupid."But they charge you less, give a higher magnification viewfinder, lots of extra stills features and a better IBIS. However the better IBIS means the heat-sinking abilities of the GH5 aren't present, so it was always going to have less video features.

"Example 2: Eos m50 crop penality with 4k; it's like Canon wants to milk the cow so badly, but we see through it."You generally get better video quality with one input pixel per output pixel, scaling images by small amounts tends not to work so well. Hence my GH4 (with a 4k crop) is a little cleaner than my GH5 (full sensor scaled).

"Example 3: Fuji X-H1 not offering pixel shift is criminal."It's their first ever IBIS, give 'em a break. Plus if you mean for hi-res that works so poorly with stuff that moves it's not much of a feature.

1) Panasonic offers a v-log software update for the gh5 and the relatively antiquated gh4 and lower-end fz-2500. Yet the g9 is left out. The gimping can't be more obvious.2) Doubt this was the intention of the m50. Its 4k is more cropped than a Micro 4/3 sensor. I think its preferred for a full sensor readout if it means a wide angle is not turned pretty much into a short tele.3) Move pixel to the right 5 times. Bang. Pixel shifted. X-trans pixel shifts easier than a Bayer sensor because the shift only needs to occur on one axis. Also, pixel shift has its uses as you well know. There are plenty of non-moving subjects out there that you will then photograph with the quality of Medium Format.

Also: would be interesting to see this kind of statistics in regard to prices and turnaround of (used) film-based camera systems. I suspect it is the opposite trend there - this kind of gear is in an upswing (but clearly by far in a much smaller amount than digital gear sells of course by numbers).

Sort of expected this....include me here, too - I am still using my digital FF mirrorless camera which I bought in 2014. I don't plan to upgrade soon either - why? Because prices for newer FF mirrorless cameras are just crazy IMO. If I upgrade, it will be a used one most likely. Depreciation of new cameras is too steep to go for this kind of prices - but the manufacturers make up for less quantity with higher prices per piece.

First, smartphones.Second, good cameras. For an amateur, for family snaps and all that casual business, there is no vital need to change his camera as long as it keeps working. Even some Nikon D90 will do the job. Since you can buy used camera cheap, why bother with new pricy things. Yeah, they are shiny, but money is money. And here goes third: money, less of them than expected, since 2008.

Hmmm, lower supply for customers. Does that mean lower demand too? Or is this a way to avoid discounts and too much inventory?

Really, a cheap Canon Rebel will give someone noticeably better quality than a smartphone, but so many are happy with smartphone image quality. The market is flooded with ILCs that are "good enough". So now camera makers are running to these tiny niches to selling even more expensive cameras. They want to drive prices higher and sell fewer "high end" or niche cameras.

Regarding the noticeably better quality on social media, it depends. On an average daytime shot with a kit lens with a fairly wide-angle shot, probably not. Under poor light and using comparatively fast lens and/or lenses with focal length differing from the generic moderate wide angle, probably yes.

I think most people only view images on their phones these days. What is the point of shooting a 40mp image if it will only ever be seen on a 4 by 6 screen? If a phone is all they see it on then a phone camera is good enough to take it on.

The quality of full-manual digital cameras “shows up” (1) when challenging subject matter is encountered and high-end results are truly desired and (2) when preparing PRINTS, which nobody here seems to mention. LARGE PRINTS are the Holy Grail; framable prints are PRESENTABLE; prints are the TREASURES that will hang on the office wall and once in a while in a MUSEUM. What is photography without THE PRINT?

cheap Rebel? No, just no. Unless you know what you're doing and post-process then the photo is better looking (not talking about pixel peeping and print quality, but who cares about that? Overwhelming majority just need to take photos to upload them online and view them on their laptops).

Yep. Smartphones are getting so much better so much faster. Moment has great new lenses for them. The new MOVI stabilizer will change everything soon. And this "new" movement called MOJO. Mobile Journalism. Seeing reporters going to smartphones. With a decent audio input, it's all that's needed. Mini rigs with small shotgun mics. Lav mics with bluetooth or wifi. And most everything being seen on the small screen. Or going right back to the smartphone. Images don't hold up to pixel peeping, but who looks anymore beside photographers? We are now doing interviews, testimonials and even photo/video all on smartphones. Even used photos from smartphones for printed materials. Billboards. Even the Bolt robot has come up with a "junior" small sized version. Pretty soon will see one for smartphone size, eh? Ha. Just a new world.

That’s a hoary old argument that died when Ansel Adams started printing pictures.Every digital image is processed, with 2/3 of most being interpolated (original Foveon being least “fake”).Unless you are shooting 35mm slides for projection or Foveon digital JPEGs everything you shoot is “fake” as well.

Numbers are not that bad. And we have to consider phone cameras, they're eating a large portion of the market. Digital cameras are disposable after some years, and it's easier to dispose of a phone, is more justifiable. Also, phone technology is evolving faster now.

People putting a smartphone on a rig with a mic represent 0.00000001% of the market. It's casual users for which a smartphone is adequate for snapshot photography and instant sharing. Only enthusiasts buy cameras anymore. Manufacturers are smart to focus on premium products. If you only view your photos on a screen device you won't be able to tell the difference between a phone and a pro camera. That, and the megapixel wars are over so people have little incentive to upgrade. Talking about casual users only here, who make up the bulk of sales.

As Old Cameras said, those phones are for snap shooters and selfie types. They replaced the point and shoots which were the mainstay and majority of sales. They have their limitations for casual shooters, just like the typical point and shoot. It's not difficult to comprehend what actually occurred in the industry. The point and shoot was merely transferred to a phone, in turn, undercutting the big boys.

You can't blame casual travelers for not buying huge DSLRs. Unless you know what you're doing, you get into postprocessing, Samsung 7 and (iPhone and other brands equivalents) simply take better-looking photos for casuals. Why would they spend $500 on Rebel T5/6 to carry around extra couple Kgs and without limited knowledge take meh photos they can't share right away?

A lot of times I took a photo with my S5, uploaded it to Shutterstock and other photobanks, just out of curiosity, and guess what? It sells, not as my other photos, but it does.

Isn't it kind of the opposite of this. For example, sony's focus on the high end, no APS-C bodies or lenses in years but model after model of $zillion bodies and lenses. Total focus on the high end translating into to far far fewer sales and a reduced bottom line????

The same with canon, no T6 uprade for xmas instead releasing the T7 and T100 in feb? While the EOS-Ms which should be the low cost leaders (no mirrors, fewer parts but same electronics as the DSLRs) all came out at disappointing high prices.

I"m an A6000 user and there's no way I'm paying double for the A6300 or tripple for the A6500...... If they don't want my $$ fine I'll just wait for canon to make something I like....

Sure armchair photographers love to salivate over the specs of an A7III but how many are used by the pros (for example at the canonikon dominated olympics) and how many of the armchair photographers actually buy them???

@ keeponkeepingon: I think you are paying attention to A7III too much, it is just an example, many other cameras that are cheaper still created excitement , I loved my Fuji XT-20 for example. My point is that unless the big name like Canon or Nikon starts innovate like Sony , Fuji and create cameras that people want to use then probably the sale will increase.

I feel the excitement of such cameras only really exists in the domain of existing DSLR / ILC owners, the sales may go up but the overall segment doesn't grow because the rest of the planet only cares about the latest / greatest mobile phone - which is, effectively, available for 24 monthly repayments with no perceived interest payments and is an ongoing cost most have accepted and can be considered an 'Operational Expenditure'. Buying the latest DSLR for $2-4.5k is viewed as a 'Capital Expenditure' and has far more visibility by the household CFO. I may start putting some dollars away each month in preparation for the next purchase. Maybe camera shops should have deposit accounts for their customers.....

Darlot... you're making assumptions about what people should like. You love your Fuji, but I love my FF Canon's more than my Fuji XT-20. Why? because they are so much more versatile. Mirrorless isn't a godsend, it's just OK.

@dgumshu: I don't make any assumption , i am talking about what I am thinking that the manufactures should do . Nothing about you should like XT-20. I have tone of Canon lenses , most of the L lenses up to 200L, but Canon just doesn't make me excited anymore. Based on the numbers of comments here about Canon recently , I think I can gauge the excitement level about Canon cameras.

But those Rebels sell more than everything and everyone else - Canon has always produced vast innovation and then rode it out until it was common place before their next event. Consider AE Program, A-1, EOS 630, EOS 3, 10D, 20D, Canon 5D, Canon 6D, Canon 7D, Canon 70D.

They are slow and cautious and while that is frustrating for those of us that wait for them to release a breakthrough product, I think it has helped them weather market changes better than others.

They need to start putting out firmware updates that, with each update, incrementally slows down the image processor, dims the LCD screen, makes inefficient use of the battery power, adds a delay to buttons actions You know, just to make the user feel like their camera is getting old and it's time for a replacement. I mean, how are they going to sustain innovation if no one's buying new cameras anymore??

Right? From playing movies and mp3s to texting to actual duty as a telephone.. aside from the improved camera there isn't much that my 2017 phone will do that my 2011 phone will not. And if the ole' EVO 4G hadn't fallen apart, I'd still be using it! I carry a real camera all the time anyway, so that's not a huge motivation. After awhile the improvements seem incremental and as my eyes get older, 4K holds less and less appeal-along with having to upgrade my entire imaging toolkit for what, so I can play phone captured 4K on a bigger screen in 4K? It's still the same tiny lens, so pretty much just a bigger sized, mediocre image.

I'd rather have a sturdy phone that won't die so I can keep spending money on better camera gear.

I have already predicted the shutter life of my current camera to be in excess of 10 years. The image quality is excellent and it is capably of anything i currently plan on doing. I am not going to be buying another camera for a while.

@Rob890 :)My first DSLR was a D5000 (gift from wife). I replaced it with a refurbished D7100. That was a significant jump in performance, image quality, and features. I don't see any cameras on the market, not for less than a mortgage payment anyway, that offer a similar jump over the D7100 even though it's now a five-year-old model. I'm doubtful there will ever be one.

I think there are a lot of people holding out recognizing that these cameras, although fantastic, likely will not drastically improve the image capturing ability and image quality of existing amateurs who already own a perfectly good camera and recognize this fact. I might be tempted by something truly ground breaking like an organic sensor camera that is within my price range. For my purposes, I am very happy with what I have. I'd rather use the money for a family vacation.

I think it's more than that. Digital photography has finally matured, thus their is no longer a need to continually upgrade with every model. The dedicated camera market will never completely disappear, though the low-end P&S has been firmly replaced by the smart device. The smart device robs Canikon and others of 'easy money' at the bottom end, but doesn't completely make them obsolete. High end gear will always have a market.

No the new rapid release business model that was predicated on how fast the technology was improving will go back to the old slow release schedules of the film era since the technology has matured. What has happened is non enthusiasts just use their phone now so no more p&s market and enthusiasts now have cameras that are, well, good enough. So they are not as compelled to upgrade. Especially when there are things like lenses they want' too. I mean if you have a ILC camera from Canon,Nikon, Sony, ect that you got in the last 5-10 years spending the money for the new model on lenses, lightning gear, courses, ect will most likely do vastly more to expand and improve your photography than buying the camera will.

Ehm the percentage worldwide, of shipped mirrorless ILCS fell further (23%) than shipped DSLRs (17%) and DSLRs were already ahead. I accept the future will have no mirrors but these figures don't show that.

"The (monetary) value of interchangeable lens system mirrorless cameras produced actually rose by 8% even though the volume produced was only 80% of production last January—just fractionally ahead of DSLRs."

Another big question . Can Canon continue to develop their own sensors. Their market is already small since these are only used in their cameras. Companies such as Sony have a much larger market to spread the cost of development and take profit from. Giving them a huge advantage that Canon simply will have a tough time fighting against.

This is not a blip. This is why Nikon has already stated they will be focusing on the upper end cameras and equipment. The place where they can charge higher prices and make some money. Building fewer camera and charging more is the new way forward.

Latest in-depth reviews

Panasonic's premium compact DC-ZS200 (TZ200 outside of North America) boasts a 24-360mm equiv. F3.3-6.4 zoom lens, making it the longest reaching 1"-type pocket camera on the market. There are tradeoffs that come with that big lens, however. Find out all the details in our in-depth review.

The Hex Raven DSLR bag holds a ton of gear and employs a low-profile design that doesn't scream "I'm a camera bag." We think it's a little too bulky for everyday use, but makes for a great option when traveling with a lot of gear.

The Sony a7 III sets a new benchmark for full-frame cameras thanks to its compelling combination of value and capability. It's at home shooting everything from sports to portraits, and is one of the most impressive all-around cameras we've seen in a long while. Find out all the details in our full review.

Latest buying guides

What's the best camera for a parent? The best cameras for shooting kids and family must have fast autofocus, good low-light image quality and great video. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for parents, and recommended the best.

What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? High resolution, weather-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting landscapes, and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera costing over $2000? The best high-end camera costing more than $2000 should have plenty of resolution, exceptional build quality, good 4K video capture and top-notch autofocus for advanced and professional users. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing over $2000 and recommended the best.

What's the best camera for taking pictures of people and events? Reliable autofocus, good image quality in low light, and great colors straight from the camera are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting people and events, and recommended the best.

The new HP DesignJet Z6 and Z9+ supposedly offer "the fastest printing capabilities available on the market today," all while using fewer ink tanks, and featuring useful add-ons like a built-in vertical trimmer.

In an effort to streamline production and minimize confusion, RED has announced that it is simplifying its product lineup to three main cameras. As an added bonus, this change dramatically drops the prices for all three options.

Fujifilm's new X-T100 is an SLR-style mirrorless camera that takes the internals of the X-A5, including phase-detect AF, and adds a fully articulating LCD and high-res OLED viewfinder. The X-T100 is priced at a very reasonable $599/€599 body-only and $699/€699/£619 with a 15-45mm lens.

Panasonic's latest firmware update for its GH5S, GH5 and G9 series of cameras was leaked in Japan earlier today and is now being officially announced a week early. But don't get too excited – you still won't be able to download it until May 30th.

We've been saying for years that the term "lens compression" is misleading, but Lee Morris over at Fstoppers has put together a useful video that explains why this is the case, and demonstrates it with two easy-to-understand examples.

Last week, some 'leaked' photos were published online that purported to show a DJI Phantom 5 drone with interchangeable lens camera and several prime lenses. The rumor was widely reported, but DPReview has learned that those images do not, in fact, show a Phantom 5 at all.

Award-winning fashion and celebrity photographer Markus Klinko recently tested out the Godox EC-200 flash extension head. Actually, he tested out four of them, creating a quad-flash ring light alternative that works great for both beauty and close-up work.

According to a recent investor presentation, Sony intends to occupy the top slot in the overall camera market by the end of 2020, beating back Canon and Nikon by boosting its interchangeable lens systems.

Google has finally added the ability to mark your favorite images in Google Photos, so they can be filtered into a dedicated album. The service is also planning to a social network-like "heart" button that lets you like other people's photos.

We've been messing around with Apollo, an iOS app that allows you to add 3D lighting effects to images using depth information, and have to say we're impressed with what it's capable of – but that doesn't mean we don't have a few requests for the next version.

The new lightweight laptop packs a whole lot of photo- and video-editing punch. The laptop can be specced out with a Core i9 processor, 16GB of RAM, 1TB of SSD storage, NVIDIA graphics with 4GB of GDDR5, and a 4K display with 100% Adobe RGB coverage.

It looks like Canon is getting into sensor sales. The three specialized CMOS sensors the company recently demoed—including a 120MP APS-H model and an ultra-low light sensor—have been listed for sale through a distributor in the US.

Kodak Alaris has launched a new single-use disposable camera in Europe. Called the Kodak Daylight Single Use Camera, this 800 ISO film camera is supposedly ideal for parties, weddings, and similar events.

Computer vision company Lucid and cinema camera maker RED have partnered to create an 8K 3D camera that can capture 4-view (4V) holographic images and video in real-time. The camera is designed to work with RED's upcoming holographic Hydrogen One smartphone.

If Canon and Nikon do get into high-end mirrorless, it's almost certain that they'll do everything they can to maintain compatibility with their existing mounts. But, asks Richard Butler, wouldn't it be more interesting if they built a small, niche system to live alongside their existing DSLRs?

You know that feeling when you're already all suited up and out on a spacewalk outside the International Space Station, and only then do you realize you forgot to put the SD card in your GoPro? No? Us either... but one astronaut on the ISS sure does.

From 2015 to 2017, filmmaker Macgregor and his crew spend many months traveling back and forth on the famed Mauritanian Railway—the so-called 'Backbone of the Sahara—to document the grueling journey endured by merchants who regularly travel atop this train. This beautifully-executed short doc is the result.

Synology has added a new 6-bay NAS to its DiskStation+ series, and it's aimed squarely at photographers and medium sized businesses. The DS1618+ can handle up to six 12TB drives, giving it a max capacity of 72TB, or up to 60TB in RAID 5.

Our original gallery for Tamron's new 70-210mm F4 had portraits, slow-moving wildlife and city scenes, but was sorely missing fast action. We remedied that by photographing some motorcycles flying through the air.

This week on DPReview TV, Chris and Jordan prepare for the summer holiday season by putting several popular waterproof cameras to the test. If you're considering a rugged camera for the beach or pool this summer, or if you just want to see what a Chris and Jordan fishing show might look like, tune in.

Soulumination is a non-profit organization that provides life-affirming legacy photography to families facing serious medical conditions, completely free of charge. This video shares the work they are doing.

Fujifilm EU seems to have accidentally leaked an unreleased camera to the masses. The leaked page details a new "X-T100" camera that will share most of its specs with the X-A5, but includes an EVF, deeper buffer, and 3-way tilting touchscreen.

LA-based director and cinematographer Phil Holland of PHFX recently joined forces with Gotham Film Works to create something out-of-this-world. Using a special aerial camera array, Holland shot a flyover of New York City using not one, not two, but three 8K RED Weapon Monstro VistaVision cameras.